Conspiracy theorists are all just gaslighting, right?
October 7, 2021 4:29 AM Subscribe
Do conspiracy theorists sincerely believe their own nonsense? It seems to me that they have to know, on some level, that they're full of shit.
(I don't know how one would measure this empirically – but if there have been attempts to approach the question from that angle, that's the kind of answer I would prefer.)
Obviously, the answer to this will vary from person to person. And no one can peer into another person's soul – so it's impossible to say, definitively, what another person "believes".
But, with those caveats:
When people profess to believe things that aren't supported by evidence and logic, I used to presume that there were two possible explanations for that behavior:
1. They've made an honest error: they're mistaken about some premise, are unfamiliar with some piece of evidence, or have made some error in reasoning.
or,
2. They're fully aware that their claim is bullshit, but profess it nonetheless, for some ulterior motive (to deceive others, to troll or gaslight, etc.)
I've come to regard that presumption as naive. I now suspect that there's a whole spectrum of possibilities between these two. (But that's just a gut feeling of mine.)
Essentially, I guess I'm talking about a spectrum of motivated reasoning – a tendency to weave narratives that disregard evidence and logic in order to justify one's own prejudices, cast oneself as clever / heroic / a brave truth-teller standing up to oppressors, and cast others as stupid / misled / villainous.
For context: I'm asking this question because I'm trying to figure out how to deal with someone who professes to believe in numerous conspiracy theories.
Basically: Do I treat them like someone who is knowingly gaslighting me? (This has been my approach recently. The evidence against their claims is not difficult to find – and the reasoning necessary to interpret that evidence, and to arrive at the non-bullshit conclusions, is not subtle. The person does not otherwise display any obvious cognitive deficits.
Therefore, given that they have access to both the information and the cognitive faculties to recognize their claims as bullshit, I have to presume that they are aware – on some level – that they are bullshitting.
That's why I consider it a kind of gaslighting. If I'm correct – that conspiracy-theorizing is a kind of motivated reasoning – then the content of their conspiracies speaks volumes about their motivations. Look at who they cast as villains – and the kind of unspeakable evil they think is reasonable to attribute to those people – and you'll see who they hold in contempt.)
Or: Do I treat them like someone who is sincerely confused? (I've tried this in the past. If you've ever been close to a conspiracy theorist, then you know how this goes. Presenting them with evidence doesn't work. Pointing out the obvious flaws and contradictions in their reasoning doesn't work. If they had been led to their false conclusions by an honest error, then you would expect these approaches to work.)
Please don't suggest cutting this person out of my life. I've already basically done that. I'm guess I'm trying to figure out if there's another possibility.
I've read tons of books and articles which profess to explain the psychology of conspiracy theorists. I have found them to be unhelpful. At the moment, I'm solely concerned with the question of whether conspiracy theorists, as a group, sincerely believe in the factual truth of their conspiracies (to whatever extent it's possible to answer that question).
Thanks!
Obviously, the answer to this will vary from person to person. And no one can peer into another person's soul – so it's impossible to say, definitively, what another person "believes".
But, with those caveats:
When people profess to believe things that aren't supported by evidence and logic, I used to presume that there were two possible explanations for that behavior:
1. They've made an honest error: they're mistaken about some premise, are unfamiliar with some piece of evidence, or have made some error in reasoning.
or,
2. They're fully aware that their claim is bullshit, but profess it nonetheless, for some ulterior motive (to deceive others, to troll or gaslight, etc.)
I've come to regard that presumption as naive. I now suspect that there's a whole spectrum of possibilities between these two. (But that's just a gut feeling of mine.)
Essentially, I guess I'm talking about a spectrum of motivated reasoning – a tendency to weave narratives that disregard evidence and logic in order to justify one's own prejudices, cast oneself as clever / heroic / a brave truth-teller standing up to oppressors, and cast others as stupid / misled / villainous.
For context: I'm asking this question because I'm trying to figure out how to deal with someone who professes to believe in numerous conspiracy theories.
Basically: Do I treat them like someone who is knowingly gaslighting me? (This has been my approach recently. The evidence against their claims is not difficult to find – and the reasoning necessary to interpret that evidence, and to arrive at the non-bullshit conclusions, is not subtle. The person does not otherwise display any obvious cognitive deficits.
Therefore, given that they have access to both the information and the cognitive faculties to recognize their claims as bullshit, I have to presume that they are aware – on some level – that they are bullshitting.
That's why I consider it a kind of gaslighting. If I'm correct – that conspiracy-theorizing is a kind of motivated reasoning – then the content of their conspiracies speaks volumes about their motivations. Look at who they cast as villains – and the kind of unspeakable evil they think is reasonable to attribute to those people – and you'll see who they hold in contempt.)
Or: Do I treat them like someone who is sincerely confused? (I've tried this in the past. If you've ever been close to a conspiracy theorist, then you know how this goes. Presenting them with evidence doesn't work. Pointing out the obvious flaws and contradictions in their reasoning doesn't work. If they had been led to their false conclusions by an honest error, then you would expect these approaches to work.)
Please don't suggest cutting this person out of my life. I've already basically done that. I'm guess I'm trying to figure out if there's another possibility.
I've read tons of books and articles which profess to explain the psychology of conspiracy theorists. I have found them to be unhelpful. At the moment, I'm solely concerned with the question of whether conspiracy theorists, as a group, sincerely believe in the factual truth of their conspiracies (to whatever extent it's possible to answer that question).
Thanks!
Over the years I have frequently received strange conspiracy theory e-mails from people who are convinced that journalism of mine from a long time ago is proof of some dark conspiracy. They 100% believe what they are saying. There are emotional rather than logical reasons for being deeply invested in these ideas.
If there is a level at which they know it's bullshit, that level is submerged super deep in their unconscious selves. Sort of like when there was a guy who drove around a van claiming that Stephen King murdered John Lennon. The author wrote to him, "I think you know on some level that I didn't kill John Lennon..."
posted by johngoren at 5:08 AM on October 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
If there is a level at which they know it's bullshit, that level is submerged super deep in their unconscious selves. Sort of like when there was a guy who drove around a van claiming that Stephen King murdered John Lennon. The author wrote to him, "I think you know on some level that I didn't kill John Lennon..."
posted by johngoren at 5:08 AM on October 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
The other possibility is continuing a relationship with this person while not discussing the areas of contention.
I think most conspiracy theorists believe what they're saying, but you're talking about an individual person here, and it's possible that person is gaslighting you. So if that's your real question, we can't answer it.
But if you're trying to figure out how to save the relationship, then I would have to say there's no point in continuing to have arguments with this person. You cannot reason with someone who is unreasonable. You cannot convince someone who has built an identity around belief. I know someone who regularly reports his arguments with anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists, and I just don't get why he's bothering to argue with them. It's not going to change their minds. I agree with bbqturtle that identities fade. I spent a lot of my teenage years completely devoted to a fundamentalist Christian group, to the dismay of my family. No one could have persuaded me that my beliefs were wrong, but over time, I found my own way out.
posted by FencingGal at 5:09 AM on October 7, 2021 [6 favorites]
I think most conspiracy theorists believe what they're saying, but you're talking about an individual person here, and it's possible that person is gaslighting you. So if that's your real question, we can't answer it.
But if you're trying to figure out how to save the relationship, then I would have to say there's no point in continuing to have arguments with this person. You cannot reason with someone who is unreasonable. You cannot convince someone who has built an identity around belief. I know someone who regularly reports his arguments with anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists, and I just don't get why he's bothering to argue with them. It's not going to change their minds. I agree with bbqturtle that identities fade. I spent a lot of my teenage years completely devoted to a fundamentalist Christian group, to the dismay of my family. No one could have persuaded me that my beliefs were wrong, but over time, I found my own way out.
posted by FencingGal at 5:09 AM on October 7, 2021 [6 favorites]
While some people might be faking it to have fun on the internet at others' expense, I think the majority of conspiracy theorists genuinely believe in the conspiracy.
The missing piece in the logic chain you suggested above is probably the fact that the conspiracy itself generally encourages its adherents to believe that any evidence that disagrees with the conspiracy is inherently suspect -- any data that contradicts the conspiracy must be something false that was produced due to corruption, incompetence, misunderstanding, etc.
As an example, a lot of the antivax conspiracy rests on the idea that the COVID case/death numbers are "inflated" -- so data, no matter how trustworthy the source, is not going to convince someone who thinks nearly every COVID death is actually a motorcycle accident/cancer/etc where some doctor was bribed to put COVID on the death certificate because the person happened to have COVID while dying of other causes.
posted by space snail at 5:10 AM on October 7, 2021 [11 favorites]
The missing piece in the logic chain you suggested above is probably the fact that the conspiracy itself generally encourages its adherents to believe that any evidence that disagrees with the conspiracy is inherently suspect -- any data that contradicts the conspiracy must be something false that was produced due to corruption, incompetence, misunderstanding, etc.
As an example, a lot of the antivax conspiracy rests on the idea that the COVID case/death numbers are "inflated" -- so data, no matter how trustworthy the source, is not going to convince someone who thinks nearly every COVID death is actually a motorcycle accident/cancer/etc where some doctor was bribed to put COVID on the death certificate because the person happened to have COVID while dying of other causes.
posted by space snail at 5:10 AM on October 7, 2021 [11 favorites]
It's all in the tone.
The other day, we received a handwritten letter from a new neighbour who is a Jehovah's Witness. She introduced herself (we haven't met) and said - quite politely - that she felt compelled to share her beliefs, and urged us to join her at the Kingdom Hall.
It wouldn't be fair to call her letter "gaslighting", even though she is, on some level, trying to convince me of the truth of some claims that I don't believe are well founded. I don't doubt that she's 100% sincere.
It sounds like you already have a good idea about why your friend believes in those theories - in time-honoured Ask MeFi fashion, they're showing you who they are. You should believe them.
posted by rd45 at 5:27 AM on October 7, 2021
The other day, we received a handwritten letter from a new neighbour who is a Jehovah's Witness. She introduced herself (we haven't met) and said - quite politely - that she felt compelled to share her beliefs, and urged us to join her at the Kingdom Hall.
It wouldn't be fair to call her letter "gaslighting", even though she is, on some level, trying to convince me of the truth of some claims that I don't believe are well founded. I don't doubt that she's 100% sincere.
It sounds like you already have a good idea about why your friend believes in those theories - in time-honoured Ask MeFi fashion, they're showing you who they are. You should believe them.
posted by rd45 at 5:27 AM on October 7, 2021
The thing is, a conspiracy theory is not necessarily an alternative set of easily disproven “facts.” Those are the end products of a narrative structure, and a systematic distrust of social institutions. Conspiracy theories are stories people tell themselves. But so, for most of us, is our faith in science or technology or engineering or “empiricism.” One story is truer than the other but they both circumvent the need to confirm things for ourselves and pivot toward the question of whether we can or do trust experts, authorities, and social consensus.
posted by spitbull at 5:32 AM on October 7, 2021 [31 favorites]
posted by spitbull at 5:32 AM on October 7, 2021 [31 favorites]
I found In Search of a Flat Earth to be interesting. He makes the argument that many conspiracy theories are roughly equivalent to doomsday cults and the seemingly bizarre beliefs are secondary to the sense of purpose and community found in them.
That is to say, conspiracy theorists typically may find it hard to come to terms with the chaotic and random nature of life. Conspiracy theories provide a justification and/or scapegoat for the things they don't like and what they really believe in is that there could be "the fix" (and by extension, in a lot of cases, a singular figure that is "the fixer").
Further, the beliefs and negative evidence often work as a form of both gatekeeping and as a means to reinforce and strength the bonds between believers.
"This may sound crazy, but here's what's really going on. X is trying to stop you from getting to the truth, but salvation is so close." Etc.
As you said, motivated reasoning. The weird beliefs are secondary to whatever their motivation is, so it's somewhat irrelevant if they truly believe them or not.
posted by hankscorpio83 at 5:43 AM on October 7, 2021 [9 favorites]
That is to say, conspiracy theorists typically may find it hard to come to terms with the chaotic and random nature of life. Conspiracy theories provide a justification and/or scapegoat for the things they don't like and what they really believe in is that there could be "the fix" (and by extension, in a lot of cases, a singular figure that is "the fixer").
Further, the beliefs and negative evidence often work as a form of both gatekeeping and as a means to reinforce and strength the bonds between believers.
"This may sound crazy, but here's what's really going on. X is trying to stop you from getting to the truth, but salvation is so close." Etc.
As you said, motivated reasoning. The weird beliefs are secondary to whatever their motivation is, so it's somewhat irrelevant if they truly believe them or not.
posted by hankscorpio83 at 5:43 AM on October 7, 2021 [9 favorites]
For the conspiracy-adjacent people in my life, I see their investment in their conspiracies of choice as being driven by many factors, some of which I can identify as: fear, genuine interest/misguided intellectual pursuit, entertainment, a certain feeling of individuality/"specialness", and usually some sense of alienation and isolation from society. The conspiracy is meeting their needs across this spectrum. It's their engagement with the act of conspiracy-theorizing which is to me the important thing. For the people I know the "belief" in the object of the conspiracy seems to be second place to the structures around it: the researching, the communities, the way of seeing and understanding the world around them. So when someone is talking to me about their pet conspiracy, I tend to view it similarly to how hardcore hobbyists are about their hobby. It's a way of being in the world, and actually the object of the hobby (trains, bird-watching, motorbikes, astrology, whatever) is not the main thing. So no, I don't think they are deliberately gaslighting you or the people they share their conspiracy with. If they are insistent on you coming over to their "side", I'd interpret that as someone who deeply needs a sense of consistency and coherency in their life, and interacting with critics destabilises the consistency and coherency that they have found via the conspiracy theory. Here is someone having trouble with the chaos and meaninglessness of life, and unfortunately they have latched on to something to soothe themselves with that is troubling and at this stage in human history, potentially quite destructive.
On preview, basically what hankscorpio83 has said more succinctly :) Also, what spitbull says.
posted by Balthamos at 5:46 AM on October 7, 2021 [6 favorites]
On preview, basically what hankscorpio83 has said more succinctly :) Also, what spitbull says.
posted by Balthamos at 5:46 AM on October 7, 2021 [6 favorites]
I think there both the believers and the conspiracies come in various flavors. I don't think believing in Bigfoot is fundamentally the same as believing in chemtrails. The former seems like group delusion but the latter is more an error in an individual's belief system.
There is a proposition that a system of belief can not be falsified by data. (I would have said this is the Duhem-Quine hypothesis but the Wikipedia article under that is about something else.) So if I say we know the earth is round because space station, they say the earth is flat because some, something, something else, with some crazy notion about satellites.
All the things we believe come with an implicit ranking in priority. Faced with a contradiction, we sacrifice the low priority to preserve the high priority. For example, the resistance to the theory of evolution is all about preserving the high priority belief that man is fundamentally different from the lower animals.
posted by SemiSalt at 5:46 AM on October 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
There is a proposition that a system of belief can not be falsified by data. (I would have said this is the Duhem-Quine hypothesis but the Wikipedia article under that is about something else.) So if I say we know the earth is round because space station, they say the earth is flat because some, something, something else, with some crazy notion about satellites.
All the things we believe come with an implicit ranking in priority. Faced with a contradiction, we sacrifice the low priority to preserve the high priority. For example, the resistance to the theory of evolution is all about preserving the high priority belief that man is fundamentally different from the lower animals.
posted by SemiSalt at 5:46 AM on October 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
Well... there are a whole host of things that people truly believe in without logic/evidence. Religion... love, sometimes... therapy, sometimes... self-help books.... conspiracy theories are just one more manifestation of the human tendency to NEED to have something to believe in.
posted by DoubleLune at 5:51 AM on October 7, 2021 [5 favorites]
posted by DoubleLune at 5:51 AM on October 7, 2021 [5 favorites]
Many conspiracy theorists believe their own theories, because we are beings that seek to find patterns in the noise of messy inputs, and understand the relationships between them. Finding these patterns also comes with a bit of a dopamine hit, and this encourages the "discovery" of complex patterns.
Most of the 9/11 conspiracy theories fail Occam's Razor. If there was a conspiracy, it is far more likely that someone with ability and motivation, perhaps V.P. Dick Cheney, reached out to the CIA for an agent to contact Bin Laden, offered Bin Laden a suitcase of money via the proxy, had another CIA agent assassinate the first agent on the way home, and then 9/11 events unfolded as the media covered. This is certainly a conspiracy, but it isn't a pleasing one to a conspiracy theory proponent, because it leaves only one person alive with knowledge of the truth, and not many bits to the jigsaw puzzle. Yet, prove to me it didn't happen.
For what it's worth, I don't believe it, but if there was a conspiracy, I firmly believe it is much closer to that simple plan, rather than some intricate plan involving demolition crews lacing the buildings with explosives -- these guys are super-proud of their work to safely demolish things in dense urban environments, and are highly patriotic -- planes full of people disappearing to hidden islands in the Pacific, monies vanishing from nearby buildings, and all the other complicated and other related things. A person without knowledge of engineering might indeed wonder "what happened to the airplanes" that crashed into the WTC, but anyone who has seen a cargo version of a plane up close knows that planes have a lot in common with a beer can, and they aren't super-solid-made-of-concrete objects that would penetrate all the way through a building intact. Truss designs have known flaws. Studying the engineering behind what happened is fascinating -- to engineers, like me. However, it may be a bit beyond the average person, and sorting out the facts from the noise when both are present is difficult, especially if one of these options comes with a dopamine hit.
The genuine conspiracy theorists who believe their theories are trying to make sense out of things that do not always lend themselves to making sense, or our preconceived notions of the world, or frightening possibilities, or tribal viewpoints, or any of many other contributing factors. It is very difficult to challenge many of these factors, because most of the time this involves needing the person to be willing to reconsider their position, which is relatively uncommon.
posted by jgreco at 5:51 AM on October 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
Most of the 9/11 conspiracy theories fail Occam's Razor. If there was a conspiracy, it is far more likely that someone with ability and motivation, perhaps V.P. Dick Cheney, reached out to the CIA for an agent to contact Bin Laden, offered Bin Laden a suitcase of money via the proxy, had another CIA agent assassinate the first agent on the way home, and then 9/11 events unfolded as the media covered. This is certainly a conspiracy, but it isn't a pleasing one to a conspiracy theory proponent, because it leaves only one person alive with knowledge of the truth, and not many bits to the jigsaw puzzle. Yet, prove to me it didn't happen.
For what it's worth, I don't believe it, but if there was a conspiracy, I firmly believe it is much closer to that simple plan, rather than some intricate plan involving demolition crews lacing the buildings with explosives -- these guys are super-proud of their work to safely demolish things in dense urban environments, and are highly patriotic -- planes full of people disappearing to hidden islands in the Pacific, monies vanishing from nearby buildings, and all the other complicated and other related things. A person without knowledge of engineering might indeed wonder "what happened to the airplanes" that crashed into the WTC, but anyone who has seen a cargo version of a plane up close knows that planes have a lot in common with a beer can, and they aren't super-solid-made-of-concrete objects that would penetrate all the way through a building intact. Truss designs have known flaws. Studying the engineering behind what happened is fascinating -- to engineers, like me. However, it may be a bit beyond the average person, and sorting out the facts from the noise when both are present is difficult, especially if one of these options comes with a dopamine hit.
The genuine conspiracy theorists who believe their theories are trying to make sense out of things that do not always lend themselves to making sense, or our preconceived notions of the world, or frightening possibilities, or tribal viewpoints, or any of many other contributing factors. It is very difficult to challenge many of these factors, because most of the time this involves needing the person to be willing to reconsider their position, which is relatively uncommon.
posted by jgreco at 5:51 AM on October 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
Science Week is coming up and my Science Café is going to have a round table on What have you changed your mind about in the last couple of years? Because we're scientists, we're asking for evidence-based changes in thinking; not necessarily [indeed please not!] about Covid. It will be interesting because most of us won't have changed our minds about anything substantive . . . ever.
In my first Uniteaching job in the 80s I was driven to develop, write and deliver a course [Evolution: from primeval soup to hominid nuts] because one of our students, a biblical fundamentalist [Plymouth Bretheren] asked me to recommend a book on evolution that they could present at their church's monthly book club. I was completely wrong-footed by this request because, although I could think of a few books, I couldn't there and then convince this young person that evolution was a better explanation of the marvellous diversity of life than God's Grandeur. And this was just a couple of years after I'd taken BI504-Evolution sitting at the feet of Lynn Margulis in graduate school. Shame on me! Like most biologists I believed in Evolution but I couldn't marshal the evidence for that belief. I can now but I can't reduce it to a tweet. I'd need to cover embryology, biogeography, geology, comparative anatomy, mating behaviour and . . . zzzzzzz.
posted by BobTheScientist at 6:00 AM on October 7, 2021 [10 favorites]
In my first Uniteaching job in the 80s I was driven to develop, write and deliver a course [Evolution: from primeval soup to hominid nuts] because one of our students, a biblical fundamentalist [Plymouth Bretheren] asked me to recommend a book on evolution that they could present at their church's monthly book club. I was completely wrong-footed by this request because, although I could think of a few books, I couldn't there and then convince this young person that evolution was a better explanation of the marvellous diversity of life than God's Grandeur. And this was just a couple of years after I'd taken BI504-Evolution sitting at the feet of Lynn Margulis in graduate school. Shame on me! Like most biologists I believed in Evolution but I couldn't marshal the evidence for that belief. I can now but I can't reduce it to a tweet. I'd need to cover embryology, biogeography, geology, comparative anatomy, mating behaviour and . . . zzzzzzz.
posted by BobTheScientist at 6:00 AM on October 7, 2021 [10 favorites]
Facts aren't the problem. Logic isn't the problem. It's the deep down shape of the logical structure that's the problem. They believe from logic and their facts a certain conclusion, just as you believe from your logic and your facts a certain conclusion. The logic isn't to blame, It's the deep shapes of the form of the logic that each side has grown slowly over time that makes up a person's core thinking. This deep shape changes over time and can morph just as one would expect. But if you tried to replace your facts with their facts on the top of your deep logic... it wouldn't work, you're not convinced. The same goes the other way... try to replace their facts with yours and it makes no sense to their deep logic core structure.
You have to be subtle. Find a border-line surface bit of logic and shallower deep logic structure where the replacement of facts actually works for them. Leave little land mines in their narrative of logic where this little bit might be wrong, or this other little bit might be wrong. Let their deep core logic structure adapt and re-form until their deep structures deform enough to match your norm. Then you can increase the dumping of your facts with ever diminishing impedance mismatch and their newly discovered plasticity of increasing depth down to the core of their logical thinking.
Those are the extremes between you and they. You both believe you're perfectly logical and fully informed with all the facts that make up a well built structure. Some believe.
There's a whole range between full on believer and knowing you're probably wrong and just being a bit of a troll because you both like to debate.
(Another escapee from Fundamental Southern Baptist childhood.)
posted by zengargoyle at 6:04 AM on October 7, 2021 [4 favorites]
You have to be subtle. Find a border-line surface bit of logic and shallower deep logic structure where the replacement of facts actually works for them. Leave little land mines in their narrative of logic where this little bit might be wrong, or this other little bit might be wrong. Let their deep core logic structure adapt and re-form until their deep structures deform enough to match your norm. Then you can increase the dumping of your facts with ever diminishing impedance mismatch and their newly discovered plasticity of increasing depth down to the core of their logical thinking.
Those are the extremes between you and they. You both believe you're perfectly logical and fully informed with all the facts that make up a well built structure. Some believe.
There's a whole range between full on believer and knowing you're probably wrong and just being a bit of a troll because you both like to debate.
(Another escapee from Fundamental Southern Baptist childhood.)
posted by zengargoyle at 6:04 AM on October 7, 2021 [4 favorites]
The sincerity of people like Alex Jones who profit from conspiracy theories is and ought to be suspect in a very straightforward way.
For others, the insincerity is really more about inconsistency or hypocrisy. People who think that paleontologists have rigged evidence of Darwinian evolution will still make use of modern medicine that relied heavily upon evolutionary theory in developing therapies. Flat earth people get on planes that would run out of fuel and crash before their destination were great circle routes false.
posted by MattD at 6:42 AM on October 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
For others, the insincerity is really more about inconsistency or hypocrisy. People who think that paleontologists have rigged evidence of Darwinian evolution will still make use of modern medicine that relied heavily upon evolutionary theory in developing therapies. Flat earth people get on planes that would run out of fuel and crash before their destination were great circle routes false.
posted by MattD at 6:42 AM on October 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
Yes. In large general, people believe in what they say. "Sincerely" is really just an over-complicating intensifier, because people are very much not only capable of but prone to, believing completely nonsensical things, or things that contradict each other with (what seems like, from the outside) only a bit of reflection. Aspects of it will always seem insincere, as it does with any confidence game from outside of it. From outside it will seem obvious that of course the amount of cognitive dissonance adherents "have to" feell seems unbelievable (that unbelievable itself fuels things like, maybe they're all lying about it and just playacting!), but that feeling of obviousness is projection. The human animal is very capable of simply not being aware of things, both internally and externally.
All that said, of course it's also possible this one individual is just doing a bit. They think they're being clever, or having an interesting personality, or getting off on gaslighty "haha they actually think I believe this all!" or whatever. But practically speaking, it doesn't matter. Treat them as if they do believe it--because most likely, they do.
posted by Drastic at 6:48 AM on October 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
All that said, of course it's also possible this one individual is just doing a bit. They think they're being clever, or having an interesting personality, or getting off on gaslighty "haha they actually think I believe this all!" or whatever. But practically speaking, it doesn't matter. Treat them as if they do believe it--because most likely, they do.
posted by Drastic at 6:48 AM on October 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
Philosophically, you may be interested in Daniel Dennett's "belief in belief". This idea distinguishes between beliefs you have, and believing in the belief that you have.
For example, your friend says they believe it's raining. You think it's cloudy, but dry. You suggest going outside to check, and they do. That's a belief. They're willing to test and verify it, because they anticipate it's going to be true - and so aren't afraid of seeing the evidence.
But let's say that you responded with "let's check the weather report" and they say "oh, well, those weather reporting websites are all shills for Big Storm". So you say, "sure, let's just look outside". And they respond with "oh, well, it's invisible rain". Okay, hmm, we can still touch the earth and see if it's damp, right? "Oh, this is invisible rain that can't be sensed on the surface".
In each instance, they have to anticipate your argument in advance in order to offer a ready excuse. They believe that they believe, quite firmly and thoroughly, but there's still that gap between it and actual (willing to be tested, like a statement "climate change is real") belief. Another way of putting it is that somewhere, your friend has to know what a real world where it's raining looks like - an accurate model of reality - in order to rationalize the true external results.
Which doesn't mean it's not true to them, or that they are lying. People are complicated.
posted by hapaxes.legomenon at 7:05 AM on October 7, 2021 [5 favorites]
For example, your friend says they believe it's raining. You think it's cloudy, but dry. You suggest going outside to check, and they do. That's a belief. They're willing to test and verify it, because they anticipate it's going to be true - and so aren't afraid of seeing the evidence.
But let's say that you responded with "let's check the weather report" and they say "oh, well, those weather reporting websites are all shills for Big Storm". So you say, "sure, let's just look outside". And they respond with "oh, well, it's invisible rain". Okay, hmm, we can still touch the earth and see if it's damp, right? "Oh, this is invisible rain that can't be sensed on the surface".
In each instance, they have to anticipate your argument in advance in order to offer a ready excuse. They believe that they believe, quite firmly and thoroughly, but there's still that gap between it and actual (willing to be tested, like a statement "climate change is real") belief. Another way of putting it is that somewhere, your friend has to know what a real world where it's raining looks like - an accurate model of reality - in order to rationalize the true external results.
Which doesn't mean it's not true to them, or that they are lying. People are complicated.
posted by hapaxes.legomenon at 7:05 AM on October 7, 2021 [5 favorites]
Sure, there are plenty of people out to con others for money or notoriety, and others who latch to conspiracies to feel like they're in the know above and apart from a great sea of gullible people, and others who believe things because they're part of a community that shares that belief (another former southern baptist here). But one of the best explanations of this I've seen is that for some, the truth is so utterly unfathomable that it's easier to believe almost anything else that seems more reasonable.
And it's here I must confess that for a good ten years as a fully grown adult, I had a very hard time believing that the moon landing actually happened. I believed the earth was round, that LHW acted alone, that Area 51 was experimental US military aircraft. I believe in the big bang and evolution. But for those ten years or so, which were regrettably well into my adulthood, it was utterly unfathomable to me that those three smart and decent men loaded themselves into a cramped rocket and flew 238,000 miles and back through the black emptiness of space with technology that I could find in a modern hand-held calculator, not knowing if the trip would be successful or if they would ever return.
At the time, it seemed easier to believe that the US desperately needed a sense of advancement and wonder after the initial brightness of the postwar years, that a moon landing would prove domination over Russia, and it would position the US as a leader in emerging science and technology for years to come, all for the price of some grainy footage. After all, the US had lied about other big things to their benefit, why not this?
With this moon stuff, I wasn't out to best anyone or elevate myself. I rarely even mentioned it to anyone. I just couldn't wrap my mind around the truth. I wonder if a lot of covid deniers developed because the idea that our safe and stable world grinding to a halt was simply unthinkable. The idea that 4.5 MILLION people and counting have died due to this? Unimaginable because it's too overwhelming. It's easier for them to believe that all these people were sick anyway, that they would have died anyway from something as innocuous as a common cold, that there was nothing that they could have done to change it.
With the moon landing thing, what changed my mind was getting my hands on legitimate sources, watching tons of debunking videos, literally deprogramming myself by educating myself about other kinds of science and learning about the brilliant people who are doing the very things I thought were unthinkable. I'd always loved history and literature, but I'd never grasped science, and by developing a curiosity about lots of different kinds of science, the truth of moon story snapped into place as a slow-burn eureka. And I'm really excited about science now.
posted by mochapickle at 7:18 AM on October 7, 2021 [21 favorites]
And it's here I must confess that for a good ten years as a fully grown adult, I had a very hard time believing that the moon landing actually happened. I believed the earth was round, that LHW acted alone, that Area 51 was experimental US military aircraft. I believe in the big bang and evolution. But for those ten years or so, which were regrettably well into my adulthood, it was utterly unfathomable to me that those three smart and decent men loaded themselves into a cramped rocket and flew 238,000 miles and back through the black emptiness of space with technology that I could find in a modern hand-held calculator, not knowing if the trip would be successful or if they would ever return.
At the time, it seemed easier to believe that the US desperately needed a sense of advancement and wonder after the initial brightness of the postwar years, that a moon landing would prove domination over Russia, and it would position the US as a leader in emerging science and technology for years to come, all for the price of some grainy footage. After all, the US had lied about other big things to their benefit, why not this?
With this moon stuff, I wasn't out to best anyone or elevate myself. I rarely even mentioned it to anyone. I just couldn't wrap my mind around the truth. I wonder if a lot of covid deniers developed because the idea that our safe and stable world grinding to a halt was simply unthinkable. The idea that 4.5 MILLION people and counting have died due to this? Unimaginable because it's too overwhelming. It's easier for them to believe that all these people were sick anyway, that they would have died anyway from something as innocuous as a common cold, that there was nothing that they could have done to change it.
With the moon landing thing, what changed my mind was getting my hands on legitimate sources, watching tons of debunking videos, literally deprogramming myself by educating myself about other kinds of science and learning about the brilliant people who are doing the very things I thought were unthinkable. I'd always loved history and literature, but I'd never grasped science, and by developing a curiosity about lots of different kinds of science, the truth of moon story snapped into place as a slow-burn eureka. And I'm really excited about science now.
posted by mochapickle at 7:18 AM on October 7, 2021 [21 favorites]
I think it's important to distinguish between conspiracy theorists (that is, the people coming up with the ideas) and conspiracy believers. I don't know about the former, and I suspect many of them like Alex Jones are probably at some level aware of the untruth, but I think the latter are generally good people (this may be a bias on my part) operating with partial or incorrect information. You know how, if your direction is off by a single degree, a thousand miles later you'll be nowhere near your intended destination? Kind of like that.
At the moment, I have a bit of sympathy for anti-Covid vaxxers, because I can see a logical path with only a slight change to the information I have, or to my motivations. I've only gotten a flu shot three times in my life. The first was at my first "real" job out of college. Our health insurance did one of those onsite flu shot clinics, and I was so excited to have health insurance that of course I participated. At the time, I was in my mid-20s and in extremely good health, to the point where I had not even vomited in almost a decade. I'd gotten the flu, of course, but it just didn't affect me. You know what did, though? The flu vaccine. After I went home that night, I got sicker than I'd been since high school. I managed to avoid throwing up, but I felt like hell and called off work the next day. The best part is, I still got the flu later that season, despite being vaccinated, because of different variants.
The reason I got the other two flu shots is also my biggest motivation for getting the Covid vaccine: my kids. When my kids were born, the hospital required proof of a flu shot in order to stay over in the recovery room with my wife. Newborns don't have immunity, and the hospital doesn't want some jackass coming in and infecting a whole maternity ward with something that could have been prevented by five minutes at CVS. So I got the shot, one for each kid. Mostly went fine. But if I didn't have kids, or if Covid had happened in the decade-plus between when I got my first flu shot, I could see myself thinking that the flu vaccine made an otherwise healthy person sick while not protecting against the flu, so why should I get the Covid vaccine? Especially since I had asymptomatic Covid that was so mild that I didn't miss any work.
There's a crucial piece of information missing in that calculation (other people), but that's understandable because we're primed in everything from media to economics classes to evaluate our decisions as distinct individuals. So without that one little correction, I could easily see myself declining the vaccine. And then the (perceived) lack of other information takes over: If healthy people don't need the vaccine, why is the government pushing so hard for them to get it? There are a number of wrong answers to this question, from implanting microchips to favors for Big Pharma.
So yeah, I think it's pretty easy for an otherwise normal, sane person to start down the wrong path accidentally, and go too far down that wrong path before realizing it's wrong. I do think it's helpful to remind oneself (especially if one is of above average intelligence and inclined to look down on those of lesser intelligence) of the general wisdom of crowds. Large-scale things go mainstream for a reason, whether that's voting a certain way, or making certain health care decisions, or liking certain art. I really like Mudhoney and thought they should have had the career that Pearl Jam had, but I also realize that Pearl Jam is a lot more appealing to the mainstream, and that Mudhoney is a band with a lot of quirks that people may not appreciate. When I'm in a distinct minority with regard to an opinion, I try to figure out why everyone else thinks the way they do, rather than just assuming they're "sheeple". That's a pretty good guard against conspiracy thinking, IMO, but I'm not sure how common it is.
posted by kevinbelt at 8:03 AM on October 7, 2021 [4 favorites]
At the moment, I have a bit of sympathy for anti-Covid vaxxers, because I can see a logical path with only a slight change to the information I have, or to my motivations. I've only gotten a flu shot three times in my life. The first was at my first "real" job out of college. Our health insurance did one of those onsite flu shot clinics, and I was so excited to have health insurance that of course I participated. At the time, I was in my mid-20s and in extremely good health, to the point where I had not even vomited in almost a decade. I'd gotten the flu, of course, but it just didn't affect me. You know what did, though? The flu vaccine. After I went home that night, I got sicker than I'd been since high school. I managed to avoid throwing up, but I felt like hell and called off work the next day. The best part is, I still got the flu later that season, despite being vaccinated, because of different variants.
The reason I got the other two flu shots is also my biggest motivation for getting the Covid vaccine: my kids. When my kids were born, the hospital required proof of a flu shot in order to stay over in the recovery room with my wife. Newborns don't have immunity, and the hospital doesn't want some jackass coming in and infecting a whole maternity ward with something that could have been prevented by five minutes at CVS. So I got the shot, one for each kid. Mostly went fine. But if I didn't have kids, or if Covid had happened in the decade-plus between when I got my first flu shot, I could see myself thinking that the flu vaccine made an otherwise healthy person sick while not protecting against the flu, so why should I get the Covid vaccine? Especially since I had asymptomatic Covid that was so mild that I didn't miss any work.
There's a crucial piece of information missing in that calculation (other people), but that's understandable because we're primed in everything from media to economics classes to evaluate our decisions as distinct individuals. So without that one little correction, I could easily see myself declining the vaccine. And then the (perceived) lack of other information takes over: If healthy people don't need the vaccine, why is the government pushing so hard for them to get it? There are a number of wrong answers to this question, from implanting microchips to favors for Big Pharma.
So yeah, I think it's pretty easy for an otherwise normal, sane person to start down the wrong path accidentally, and go too far down that wrong path before realizing it's wrong. I do think it's helpful to remind oneself (especially if one is of above average intelligence and inclined to look down on those of lesser intelligence) of the general wisdom of crowds. Large-scale things go mainstream for a reason, whether that's voting a certain way, or making certain health care decisions, or liking certain art. I really like Mudhoney and thought they should have had the career that Pearl Jam had, but I also realize that Pearl Jam is a lot more appealing to the mainstream, and that Mudhoney is a band with a lot of quirks that people may not appreciate. When I'm in a distinct minority with regard to an opinion, I try to figure out why everyone else thinks the way they do, rather than just assuming they're "sheeple". That's a pretty good guard against conspiracy thinking, IMO, but I'm not sure how common it is.
posted by kevinbelt at 8:03 AM on October 7, 2021 [4 favorites]
I also think conspiracy thinking would decrease if powerful people would stop behaving conspiratorially. The more cases in which powerful people are shown to be colluding, the more people believe that collusion behind closed doors is a thing that happens. Like, if you told someone who had never heard of MKULTRA that the CIA secretly gave a bunch of people LSD, they would probably think you're a conspiracy theorist. But that actually happened! And so the barriers against outlandishness gradually fall.
posted by kevinbelt at 8:07 AM on October 7, 2021 [12 favorites]
posted by kevinbelt at 8:07 AM on October 7, 2021 [12 favorites]
I believe there is cognitive dissonance going on. I think it begins with anxiety creating such strong feelings that lucid, dispassionate thought is impossible. Then the person is confronted with an unpalatable fact, like powerlessness: You are going to die, the health system can't prevent that, nobody in the health system actually cares about you individually, the health system doesn't care that the treatments they prescribe may not work and cause you misery. So the emotional reaction is hostility and mistrust: Why am I going to you, when you don't meet my needs for security and connection?
Then you add ideas that provide hope: What if diluting compounds in water in a rigorous regime or methodical and carefully measured steps creates a medicine that works? Then you add evidence: Homeopathy works: Millions of people get relief of symptoms during homeopathy, either because they took the treatment and it coincided with an unrelated reduction in symptoms, or because of the placebo effect. Good bedside manner is a thing that really works. It doesn't create miracles, but every time a mother picks up a sobbing child with a scraped knee and cuddles them, the feeling of safety and belonging causes the pain to abate and to matter much less. Prayer and taking a sugar pill both can create the same feeling of security and belonging as the mother. We feel a vast sense of relief when we are rescued, when someone pays attention to our pain and devotes themself to trying to make it better. Homeopathy works.
So then the person has to balance the two concepts - I feel so much better when I join a crowd of people like me who are on the internet, putting down the doctors and medical establishment who seem to do nothing but gouge me for money and demand I comply with regimes than are difficult and make me feel miserable and don't work (such as dieting) and get hostile with me when they don't work. "I went to six doctors and they all said it was in my head." And those same sympathetic people eagerly suggest I do things that provide some relief (because of coincidence or placebo effect) and comfortingly suggest I can stop doing things that make me miserable and which weren't even working anyway.
The establishment has told these people to stay home and not see extended family and not go to church. If they do that they are lonely, lack stimulation, and their anxiety level ratchets up to unbearable. If they leave the house and see their family and go to church, there is no immediate bad consequence for them - 98% of them do not promptly see someone close to them get deathly ill, but they do feel much safer, much more connected and loved and they get the input they need to stave off mental health problems, lack of income and loneliness.
Combine this with scary information from the medical establishment: Vaccines much less effective in older people... It is not recommended that you receive the Moderna vaccine due to the possibility of blood clots... The CDC has waived normal requirements for long term testing... There was only meager trust to begin with, but when you throw information like this at someone who is so distressed they can't think clearly, you get paralysis. Maybe I shouldn't get the vaccine? So they ask the people they trust, that older guy from church who advised them about taking fish oil for your heart and your arthritis, their minister who prays with them and knows all about their family and says very special prayers for theirr unique circumstances, "Oh Lord, help sister Wilson find a way to pay her mortgage this month, make her arthritis better and remind her children of their bond with their mother so they call more often..." And these familiar members of their support network experts are recommending homeopathy and prayer and microdosing Invermectin.
They're not recommending that anyone take massive amounts of Invermectin, just tiny, tiny doses. Almost homeopathic quantities. And they are as appalled as anyone when someone with very bad judgement and a panic attack takes horse sized doses of Invermectin and dies, the same way that people who trust the medical establishment are appalled when rich people fly to Yukon during the pandemic, claim to be there to work at the hotel, and get vaccines intended for the small, isolated and vulnerable community. They are both saying "How can people be so stupid??" Both sides of the vaccine divide are presenting the panicky idiots on the other side as representative of the average person on the other side, which is like equating the Westboro Baptist Church with all Christians or the Son of Sam with all unbelievers. Every nasty post on facebook they see makes them convinced that the other side is stupid and wrong and malicious, because it's all so gleefully mean.
When you get someone like Joseph Mercola, you have a more extreme version of the average vaccine hesitant person. He has helped hundreds of thousands of people with his homeopathy and he knows it, because they have written to him. He wants to believe it works and he has masses of evidence that it works... and it feels so good to be helping people! All those letters and testimonials. Also, there is his income which is quite decent, which he needs to keep his website and his business going and all those personal things that makes a steady income essential. He has people relying on him.
To get him to accept the idea that he is hurting people, that he is causing hundreds of thousands of deaths, that he has willfully ignored evidence and believed things only because they are emotionally plausible, that he is not a good, loving, independent thinker - that he is in fact, stupid and credulous... Ego death. It's insurmountable. Just glimmers of doubt would cause a psychotic break. On some level he knows, and that makes him all the more rabid in his belief.
But the level is below the conscious level, it's a feeling of panic, suppressed with long practice, channeled into supporting his empire of misinformation. It's as deeply buried as traumatic repression, the person who doesn't ever think about how they were molested and misused because they KNOW they had a really good childhood, and Daddy was a great father. It's on par with the person who drinks themself insensible every night because that way they don't ever think about the missiles they launched at the city of Baghdad - precision bombs of course that never killed any civilians, during a just war to remove Saddam Hussein the Al Qaeda terrorist from oppressing the Iraqis who all really just wanted to adopt American values and gain American freedoms...
I am a good person. I love other people. I am helping. People admire me. Only an idiot would believe what they believe. I am keeping my tribe SAFE!
posted by Jane the Brown at 8:10 AM on October 7, 2021 [10 favorites]
Then you add ideas that provide hope: What if diluting compounds in water in a rigorous regime or methodical and carefully measured steps creates a medicine that works? Then you add evidence: Homeopathy works: Millions of people get relief of symptoms during homeopathy, either because they took the treatment and it coincided with an unrelated reduction in symptoms, or because of the placebo effect. Good bedside manner is a thing that really works. It doesn't create miracles, but every time a mother picks up a sobbing child with a scraped knee and cuddles them, the feeling of safety and belonging causes the pain to abate and to matter much less. Prayer and taking a sugar pill both can create the same feeling of security and belonging as the mother. We feel a vast sense of relief when we are rescued, when someone pays attention to our pain and devotes themself to trying to make it better. Homeopathy works.
So then the person has to balance the two concepts - I feel so much better when I join a crowd of people like me who are on the internet, putting down the doctors and medical establishment who seem to do nothing but gouge me for money and demand I comply with regimes than are difficult and make me feel miserable and don't work (such as dieting) and get hostile with me when they don't work. "I went to six doctors and they all said it was in my head." And those same sympathetic people eagerly suggest I do things that provide some relief (because of coincidence or placebo effect) and comfortingly suggest I can stop doing things that make me miserable and which weren't even working anyway.
The establishment has told these people to stay home and not see extended family and not go to church. If they do that they are lonely, lack stimulation, and their anxiety level ratchets up to unbearable. If they leave the house and see their family and go to church, there is no immediate bad consequence for them - 98% of them do not promptly see someone close to them get deathly ill, but they do feel much safer, much more connected and loved and they get the input they need to stave off mental health problems, lack of income and loneliness.
Combine this with scary information from the medical establishment: Vaccines much less effective in older people... It is not recommended that you receive the Moderna vaccine due to the possibility of blood clots... The CDC has waived normal requirements for long term testing... There was only meager trust to begin with, but when you throw information like this at someone who is so distressed they can't think clearly, you get paralysis. Maybe I shouldn't get the vaccine? So they ask the people they trust, that older guy from church who advised them about taking fish oil for your heart and your arthritis, their minister who prays with them and knows all about their family and says very special prayers for theirr unique circumstances, "Oh Lord, help sister Wilson find a way to pay her mortgage this month, make her arthritis better and remind her children of their bond with their mother so they call more often..." And these familiar members of their support network experts are recommending homeopathy and prayer and microdosing Invermectin.
They're not recommending that anyone take massive amounts of Invermectin, just tiny, tiny doses. Almost homeopathic quantities. And they are as appalled as anyone when someone with very bad judgement and a panic attack takes horse sized doses of Invermectin and dies, the same way that people who trust the medical establishment are appalled when rich people fly to Yukon during the pandemic, claim to be there to work at the hotel, and get vaccines intended for the small, isolated and vulnerable community. They are both saying "How can people be so stupid??" Both sides of the vaccine divide are presenting the panicky idiots on the other side as representative of the average person on the other side, which is like equating the Westboro Baptist Church with all Christians or the Son of Sam with all unbelievers. Every nasty post on facebook they see makes them convinced that the other side is stupid and wrong and malicious, because it's all so gleefully mean.
When you get someone like Joseph Mercola, you have a more extreme version of the average vaccine hesitant person. He has helped hundreds of thousands of people with his homeopathy and he knows it, because they have written to him. He wants to believe it works and he has masses of evidence that it works... and it feels so good to be helping people! All those letters and testimonials. Also, there is his income which is quite decent, which he needs to keep his website and his business going and all those personal things that makes a steady income essential. He has people relying on him.
To get him to accept the idea that he is hurting people, that he is causing hundreds of thousands of deaths, that he has willfully ignored evidence and believed things only because they are emotionally plausible, that he is not a good, loving, independent thinker - that he is in fact, stupid and credulous... Ego death. It's insurmountable. Just glimmers of doubt would cause a psychotic break. On some level he knows, and that makes him all the more rabid in his belief.
But the level is below the conscious level, it's a feeling of panic, suppressed with long practice, channeled into supporting his empire of misinformation. It's as deeply buried as traumatic repression, the person who doesn't ever think about how they were molested and misused because they KNOW they had a really good childhood, and Daddy was a great father. It's on par with the person who drinks themself insensible every night because that way they don't ever think about the missiles they launched at the city of Baghdad - precision bombs of course that never killed any civilians, during a just war to remove Saddam Hussein the Al Qaeda terrorist from oppressing the Iraqis who all really just wanted to adopt American values and gain American freedoms...
I am a good person. I love other people. I am helping. People admire me. Only an idiot would believe what they believe. I am keeping my tribe SAFE!
posted by Jane the Brown at 8:10 AM on October 7, 2021 [10 favorites]
The vast majority believe in their conspiracy theory of choice. And i do mean BELIEVE. To the point that any counter argument you make will be met with disbelief and the notion that whoever made the stats or whatever you have to back your argument up is "in on it" or "never going to tell the truth" or "trying to take my freedom (guns, rights etc).
However, i do believe there are people promoting these theories that profit (alex jones, who probably does believe some but also sees a cash cow) and there are people who are promoting these theories who are sitting back enjoying the power they have over the people who they are misleading. Enjoying gathering a crowd of people who are hyping their posts etc up. For those people, it is less about beliefs and more about causing chaos for their own shits and giggles.
posted by domino at 8:14 AM on October 7, 2021
However, i do believe there are people promoting these theories that profit (alex jones, who probably does believe some but also sees a cash cow) and there are people who are promoting these theories who are sitting back enjoying the power they have over the people who they are misleading. Enjoying gathering a crowd of people who are hyping their posts etc up. For those people, it is less about beliefs and more about causing chaos for their own shits and giggles.
posted by domino at 8:14 AM on October 7, 2021
I used to believe that there was a level of "nudge nudge I'm just giving fan service to my social group" thing going on with conspiracy theorists, but the more I see what my mom is pushing with her anti-vaxx stuff (and testified at the same Ohio legislature hearing where Sherri Tenpenny said that the COVID-19 vaccines would magnetize people), and having engaged someone else in my social group who was a flat earther (who later left said group for a number of reasons), I'm now convinced that they really do believe.
And I think much of it is in the myths that a social group develops. I mean, why I do I believe vaccines work, and that deaths from COVID-19 are massively under-diagnosed? Because I'm two degrees or so of relationships from my County health officer. My social group includes people who work in molecular biology. If I felt that I needed to get in touch with various people writing papers, I know which of my friends I'd say "hey, I want an intro" to.
When my Mom does these things, she's either confusing YouTube personalities with friends, or talking to her friends in the Anthroposophic/Waldorf community that I grew up in, and who have been hardcore Homeopathy believers since their parents and their parents before them. So when she wants confirmation on falling death rates from preventable diseases, she'll roll her eyes and say "oh, yeah, I wonder how they came up with those numbers."
And "confusing YouTube personalities with friends" seems harsh, but: how many actual practicing emergency room doctors do I have regular contact with in my life? Not a whole lot. I've talked to some people in nursing since the pandemic started, and they've said "yeah, I'm under-employed right now but the ICU is a shit show", but there I'm making inferences from my social group about things they've heard.
Extend that out a degree of separation or so, and if your nursing friends are vaccine deniers (and, yes, there are some), and I can kinda see how they get there. Especially if there's trauma in your life that you've associated, rightly or wrongly, with the medical establishment.
posted by straw at 8:44 AM on October 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
And I think much of it is in the myths that a social group develops. I mean, why I do I believe vaccines work, and that deaths from COVID-19 are massively under-diagnosed? Because I'm two degrees or so of relationships from my County health officer. My social group includes people who work in molecular biology. If I felt that I needed to get in touch with various people writing papers, I know which of my friends I'd say "hey, I want an intro" to.
When my Mom does these things, she's either confusing YouTube personalities with friends, or talking to her friends in the Anthroposophic/Waldorf community that I grew up in, and who have been hardcore Homeopathy believers since their parents and their parents before them. So when she wants confirmation on falling death rates from preventable diseases, she'll roll her eyes and say "oh, yeah, I wonder how they came up with those numbers."
And "confusing YouTube personalities with friends" seems harsh, but: how many actual practicing emergency room doctors do I have regular contact with in my life? Not a whole lot. I've talked to some people in nursing since the pandemic started, and they've said "yeah, I'm under-employed right now but the ICU is a shit show", but there I'm making inferences from my social group about things they've heard.
Extend that out a degree of separation or so, and if your nursing friends are vaccine deniers (and, yes, there are some), and I can kinda see how they get there. Especially if there's trauma in your life that you've associated, rightly or wrongly, with the medical establishment.
posted by straw at 8:44 AM on October 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
Once, I was married to someone who was both a bullshitter and a conspiracy theorist, kind of like Donald Trump. And I can attest that while he lied almost every time he opened his mouth, he also believed in the ridiculous conspiracy theories he peddled. And in a way it made sense. Since he believed that every person with any power was insincere and part of a complicated global cabal, he also believed that in order to be succesfull he would need to lie and to either be included into the cabal or expose the cabal so he could replace it with his own cabal. Unlike Trump, he was not able to persuade a lot of people to join him, probably because he hadn't inherited millions from his dad.
Does everyone who supports Trump believe in all of Trump's bullshit? Probably not. But they may believe in the child-sacrificing cabal part of it, because otherwise they can't make sense of the world. Some of the above posters have pointed to how that sense-making can work or not work. For my ex and millions of others, the issue was that they had grown up in an environment where being white and male ensured the highest level of privilege, without any notable effort or even money. Seeing women and people of color gain recognition was so entirely unthinkable that for them, there had to be "an other explanation".
My ex believed I was born into the global cabal because (surprise!) I have Jewish heritage, and he expected me to help him get in. When he realised I wouldn't/couldn't (because there is no such thing), he thought I was hiding stuff from him, and he became dangerously angry with me.
When I met him, I thought his ideas were so ridiculous that it would be easy for me to change his mind. Reader, it wasn't. If anything, he has become more radical over time, as he has become increasingly isolated.
posted by mumimor at 9:41 AM on October 7, 2021 [10 favorites]
Does everyone who supports Trump believe in all of Trump's bullshit? Probably not. But they may believe in the child-sacrificing cabal part of it, because otherwise they can't make sense of the world. Some of the above posters have pointed to how that sense-making can work or not work. For my ex and millions of others, the issue was that they had grown up in an environment where being white and male ensured the highest level of privilege, without any notable effort or even money. Seeing women and people of color gain recognition was so entirely unthinkable that for them, there had to be "an other explanation".
My ex believed I was born into the global cabal because (surprise!) I have Jewish heritage, and he expected me to help him get in. When he realised I wouldn't/couldn't (because there is no such thing), he thought I was hiding stuff from him, and he became dangerously angry with me.
When I met him, I thought his ideas were so ridiculous that it would be easy for me to change his mind. Reader, it wasn't. If anything, he has become more radical over time, as he has become increasingly isolated.
posted by mumimor at 9:41 AM on October 7, 2021 [10 favorites]
PS: while I knew of his "beliefs", I only learnt of his lies after our divorce. Just to put that straight.
posted by mumimor at 9:43 AM on October 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by mumimor at 9:43 AM on October 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
Depends on the conspiracy theory. I thought long and hard about any CT's I might believe in. I think a lot depends on your point of view. Was believing that ridiculous Russian conspiracy about Trump believing in a conspiracy or simply believing in your position. The Russians have photos of Trump being peed on by hookers in a Moscow hotel? Come on. That Barry Obama is not a citizen? Come on. All about your political position and what you WANT to believe is accurate.
Are there aliens hiding at Area 54? Initially that would be absurd. But, as time has gone on the Air Force has released videos of UFOs. Some things come out over time to confirm or refute theories.
I do believe in what could only be called a conspiracy theory. I am convinced that the NBA is fixed. You cannot convince me otherwise. The refs are told who to favor. While there is no script for how the game will end a la pro wrestling, certain teams and certain players are favored or refereed against. There is zero chance I would ever bet on an NBA game. The NBA is entertainment and big money. THe profits are often tied to TV ratings and the next contract. Why wouldn't the owners do everything they can to boost ratings? (Here is a legit NBA fraud.) Maybe the players see the owners up to no good and think they too should get in on the action?
I think sometimes it is ignorance of the facts. Sometimes it is a legit difference of opinion as to where the facts lead, and sometimes it is just craziness.
posted by AugustWest at 9:44 AM on October 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
Are there aliens hiding at Area 54? Initially that would be absurd. But, as time has gone on the Air Force has released videos of UFOs. Some things come out over time to confirm or refute theories.
I do believe in what could only be called a conspiracy theory. I am convinced that the NBA is fixed. You cannot convince me otherwise. The refs are told who to favor. While there is no script for how the game will end a la pro wrestling, certain teams and certain players are favored or refereed against. There is zero chance I would ever bet on an NBA game. The NBA is entertainment and big money. THe profits are often tied to TV ratings and the next contract. Why wouldn't the owners do everything they can to boost ratings? (Here is a legit NBA fraud.) Maybe the players see the owners up to no good and think they too should get in on the action?
I think sometimes it is ignorance of the facts. Sometimes it is a legit difference of opinion as to where the facts lead, and sometimes it is just craziness.
posted by AugustWest at 9:44 AM on October 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
Actually, I've been thinking about this, because it looks like I will be invited to talk about political power in a setting which I would describe as being dominated by leftist conspiracy theories. I am politically solidly on the far left. But I can also see that people who only approach politics from a theoretical position are prone to imagine conspiracies where the reality is ignorance.
I wonder how I can convey this to students in a way that is useful and not too depressing.
posted by mumimor at 9:51 AM on October 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
I wonder how I can convey this to students in a way that is useful and not too depressing.
posted by mumimor at 9:51 AM on October 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
Many people are sufficiently on the outside of various institutions and systems of power in our society that they are prone to believing simplistic but false explanations of why things are the way they are, rather than understanding the often complicated and nuanced truth, which may require some knowledge and/or experience of the way government, science, medicine, media, etc. actually function that they just don't possess.
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 10:01 AM on October 7, 2021 [5 favorites]
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 10:01 AM on October 7, 2021 [5 favorites]
I'm with the it-takes-all-kinds respondents here. Meaning there are more than just the two options you lay out. Such as: my friend, of above-average intelligence, who believes some of what he believes less because he's sure of it and more because what he's sure of is that he DOESN'T believe politicians or The New York Times. He's certainly not gaslighting -- he's not pushing what he believes on anybody -- and I'm not sure I'd say he's confused, exactly. Sometimes 9/11 IS an inside job. Sometimes Jeffrey Epstein DOES hang himself. There are conspiracies, and I think most of us know it. I just think most of us find out about them from our usual news sources, and don't spend a lot of time trying to research which other theories might actually be true. And some of us are more likely to believe YouTube randos over The Washington Post. But if you were sure the Times and Post had lied to you before, I imagine you'd look *somewhere* for info that you could feel more confident believing.
posted by troywestfield at 10:29 AM on October 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by troywestfield at 10:29 AM on October 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
Humans are really social and also responsive to leaders. We have a lying fake-news-generating network that teaches, encourages, allows people to embrace falsehoods. We had a President who lied all day every day, still lies, and many legislators who embrace and extend those lies. I tried to watch some news today, but it was all House testimony about the AZ vote audit; so much outright deception I was yelling at the screen. The screen doesn't listen; I had to shut it off.
I have an old friend, very progressive, who is a 9/11 conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer. She wholeheartedly believes her conspiracy theories. I have a theory that there's a well-funded, skilled, Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy to create, spread and maintain lies that benefit very wealthy extremists. I believe it, but am open to discussion and learning something else that explains how the US has been dragged into such a bizarre state.
I'm confident that many of the lying talking heads on Fox know they're lying, but are well-paid and choose not to care. I think Doubly-Impeached Lying Corrupt Ex-President trump mostly knows he's lying, but he also seems addled and I can't tell. I've been duped before, and it's a bad feeling to come to reality and realize I've been a fool. That alone keeps people believing bullshit long after they've begun to realize it's false. as far as I can tell, a lot of white supremacists, election denialists, anti-vaxxers, etc., wholeheartedly believe the bullshit they've been carefully and convincingly fed. The Washington Post had a good article yesterday.
posted by theora55 at 11:42 AM on October 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
I have an old friend, very progressive, who is a 9/11 conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer. She wholeheartedly believes her conspiracy theories. I have a theory that there's a well-funded, skilled, Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy to create, spread and maintain lies that benefit very wealthy extremists. I believe it, but am open to discussion and learning something else that explains how the US has been dragged into such a bizarre state.
I'm confident that many of the lying talking heads on Fox know they're lying, but are well-paid and choose not to care. I think Doubly-Impeached Lying Corrupt Ex-President trump mostly knows he's lying, but he also seems addled and I can't tell. I've been duped before, and it's a bad feeling to come to reality and realize I've been a fool. That alone keeps people believing bullshit long after they've begun to realize it's false. as far as I can tell, a lot of white supremacists, election denialists, anti-vaxxers, etc., wholeheartedly believe the bullshit they've been carefully and convincingly fed. The Washington Post had a good article yesterday.
posted by theora55 at 11:42 AM on October 7, 2021 [3 favorites]
To answer your abstract question: yes, but they're also gaslighting themselves, or they've been very effectively fooled by someone else whose information they (for some reason) trust more than yours. Does it count as "lying to you" if the person lying is also lying to themself first? Conspiracy theorists certainly know their beliefs are not what everyone else believes - that's part of the reason they persist in believing them (special gnosis). It's absolutely a form of motivated reasoning. If they're not treating you as a financial mark (which would augur against the sincerity of their beliefs), then they're mostly interested in convincing you of the conspiracies so you can join them in their specialness. IMO religious evangelism is a version of this. Like, I don't think people who tell me "Angry Sky Dad is angry because of your drinking and sexing and playing cards on the Sabbath!" are necessarily trying to gaslight me, as long as they live by the set of beliefs they're trying to convince me of. If they're not, then yeah, they're trying to play on my fear that I might not know How To Be Good, and get some social or cultural or actual capital out of me. I agree with your gut feeling that there is a broad spectrum of motivated reasoning between "honestly mistaken true believer" and "snake-oil salesman."
posted by All hands bury the dead at 12:18 PM on October 7, 2021
posted by All hands bury the dead at 12:18 PM on October 7, 2021
They've made an honest error: they're mistaken about some premise, are unfamiliar with some piece of evidence, or have made some error in reasoning.
I think your orientation might be getting in your way here. In my experience evidence and reason are results of conspiracy theories, not causes.
Someone who believes that vaccines are the first step to communism believes that because it feels right. It fills in a spot in their personal jigsaw puzzle of beliefs. That would be enough for them, but for the benefit of people who are stuck on logic they will produce a framework of premises and arguments to act as proof.
This isn’t really limited to conspiracy theorists. All of us do it. Humans are not logical animals.
Given how integral the process is to being human I would guess the majority of people who believe in unlikely scenarios are expressing the way they truly feel.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 1:46 PM on October 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
I think your orientation might be getting in your way here. In my experience evidence and reason are results of conspiracy theories, not causes.
Someone who believes that vaccines are the first step to communism believes that because it feels right. It fills in a spot in their personal jigsaw puzzle of beliefs. That would be enough for them, but for the benefit of people who are stuck on logic they will produce a framework of premises and arguments to act as proof.
This isn’t really limited to conspiracy theorists. All of us do it. Humans are not logical animals.
Given how integral the process is to being human I would guess the majority of people who believe in unlikely scenarios are expressing the way they truly feel.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 1:46 PM on October 7, 2021 [2 favorites]
Don't underestimate the number of people in your group #1 who are mentally ill or cognitively impaired.
Don't underestimate the number of people in your group #2 who are looking for mentally ill or cognitively impaired persons that they can take advantage of in one way or another.
posted by KayQuestions at 4:00 PM on October 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
Don't underestimate the number of people in your group #2 who are looking for mentally ill or cognitively impaired persons that they can take advantage of in one way or another.
posted by KayQuestions at 4:00 PM on October 7, 2021 [1 favorite]
I think many *want* to believe, which is a different thing. Much like many churches, you have a group you wish to stay in who says they believe X. You may or may not have misgivings, but being in the group is contingent on it.
posted by emjaybee at 4:45 PM on October 7, 2021
posted by emjaybee at 4:45 PM on October 7, 2021
In my totally subjective opinion, most of these individuals do believe in their theories (of course there are cynics who do it for politics or monetary gain, but they aren’t the majority). The “honest” conspiracy people have very active imagination coupled with some sort of anxiety. In life many things are unclear or unexpected. To solve these riddles, they put their imagination to work and start inventing scenarios. For a while, these scenarios provide them with answers and peace of mind. But it is temporary. Sooner or later it becomes unsatisfactorily and a new, exciting theory needs to be created. Part of the pleasure is spreading and sharing their theories with others, for self gratification.
posted by oberon_1 at 12:34 AM on October 8, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by oberon_1 at 12:34 AM on October 8, 2021 [1 favorite]
Many conspiracy theories mix in true facts but then interpret them in line with a larger conspiracy. Because there are kernels of truth it's very hard to actually "prove" that it's not supported by evidence. Unless you are an expert in the field, at the end of the day it often comes down to trust. I trust that if most scientists are saying it then it's right.
Some examples from close friends / sibling: Becoming convinced that there is a cure for Diabetes and Big Pharma is assassinating those who have the cure to maintain their insulin profits. At the core they have diabetes and see countless real examples of pharmaceutical companies corruption and insult price gouging first hand. Becoming convinced that PizzaGate is real. They are a bit of a troll and like pushing people's buttons but started with just genuine concerns about establishment DNC politics. As they got more and more backlash and became socially isolated they dove more and more into conspiracy theories. I've argued with them and they know way more facts than I do, usually when I fact check them I learn something new. An example is 7 world trade center, in their words, the office of the secret service which coincidentally burned down on the same day and yet wasn't included in the report. Generously, those are basically all true facts being twisted into a conspiracy. I believe extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. He would say that given all the known bad things the US has done it's not an extraordinary claim. Someone else is extremely anxious about getting the Covid vaccine, to the point of having partial panic attacks, because she doesn't trust it and "it's better for your body to fight it off and build natural immunity without crazy chemicals". Her friend has Crohn's, a poorly understood chronic condition. When science has a very weak understanding and no cure available it's natural to turn to other explanations like "chemicals in our environment", "our gut being ruined by poor eating habits" etc. Once these root ideas take hold, cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias makes the easy next step to build an entire world of related conspiracies that go along with it.
At the end of the day unless someone is benefitting with money or power from a conspiracy theory I strongly assume that it's a sincerely held belief.
If you want to do an experiment, take a recent conspiracy theory you've heard and investigate it as if you were an undecided person. Are all of the facts completely fabricated? Are they using real numbers but misinterpreting them? Is it easy to find the actual numbers or do you end up with a bunch of maintstream sources citing each other or citing an expert on what the right way is to interpret the number? I expect you'll end up surprised the extent to which partial and misinterpreted truths are mixed in. It's honestly extremely disconcerting. It takes a lot of energy to actually figure out what the flaws are in each of the pieces they've put together. And that's because I'm not an expert! At the end of the day I trust the experts in each area to tell me what is going on. Because I can't live life verifying everything for myself. But the world is a way way messier place than news articles portray and so if you actually start looking at data or events as a non-expert you can easily end up at any conclusion you like.
posted by aaabbbccc at 1:13 AM on October 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
Some examples from close friends / sibling: Becoming convinced that there is a cure for Diabetes and Big Pharma is assassinating those who have the cure to maintain their insulin profits. At the core they have diabetes and see countless real examples of pharmaceutical companies corruption and insult price gouging first hand. Becoming convinced that PizzaGate is real. They are a bit of a troll and like pushing people's buttons but started with just genuine concerns about establishment DNC politics. As they got more and more backlash and became socially isolated they dove more and more into conspiracy theories. I've argued with them and they know way more facts than I do, usually when I fact check them I learn something new. An example is 7 world trade center, in their words, the office of the secret service which coincidentally burned down on the same day and yet wasn't included in the report. Generously, those are basically all true facts being twisted into a conspiracy. I believe extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. He would say that given all the known bad things the US has done it's not an extraordinary claim. Someone else is extremely anxious about getting the Covid vaccine, to the point of having partial panic attacks, because she doesn't trust it and "it's better for your body to fight it off and build natural immunity without crazy chemicals". Her friend has Crohn's, a poorly understood chronic condition. When science has a very weak understanding and no cure available it's natural to turn to other explanations like "chemicals in our environment", "our gut being ruined by poor eating habits" etc. Once these root ideas take hold, cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias makes the easy next step to build an entire world of related conspiracies that go along with it.
At the end of the day unless someone is benefitting with money or power from a conspiracy theory I strongly assume that it's a sincerely held belief.
If you want to do an experiment, take a recent conspiracy theory you've heard and investigate it as if you were an undecided person. Are all of the facts completely fabricated? Are they using real numbers but misinterpreting them? Is it easy to find the actual numbers or do you end up with a bunch of maintstream sources citing each other or citing an expert on what the right way is to interpret the number? I expect you'll end up surprised the extent to which partial and misinterpreted truths are mixed in. It's honestly extremely disconcerting. It takes a lot of energy to actually figure out what the flaws are in each of the pieces they've put together. And that's because I'm not an expert! At the end of the day I trust the experts in each area to tell me what is going on. Because I can't live life verifying everything for myself. But the world is a way way messier place than news articles portray and so if you actually start looking at data or events as a non-expert you can easily end up at any conclusion you like.
posted by aaabbbccc at 1:13 AM on October 9, 2021 [2 favorites]
All people “want to believe” there is order in the universe and that their little existence somehow fits into that order and matters. All of us. It’s a feature of human cognition and social evolution.
“Sincerity” is a nice euphemistic word for “believing whatever bullshit we believe with all due intensity.” It’s how we lie to ourselves. I rank the term “sincerity” right up there with the fiction of “good intentions” excusing bad outcomes.
posted by spitbull at 5:32 AM on October 9, 2021
“Sincerity” is a nice euphemistic word for “believing whatever bullshit we believe with all due intensity.” It’s how we lie to ourselves. I rank the term “sincerity” right up there with the fiction of “good intentions” excusing bad outcomes.
posted by spitbull at 5:32 AM on October 9, 2021
Conspiracy theorists essentially live in a Conspiracy Cinematic Universe, where powerful forces are eternally out to get them. So they’re willing to overlook flaws in the theories, because those theories generally agree with their Cinematic Universe.
I mean we all do it to some degree of another. Think of the last time you overlooked a weak point in somebody’s argument, just because you happened to agree with them.
posted by panama joe at 6:35 AM on October 9, 2021
I mean we all do it to some degree of another. Think of the last time you overlooked a weak point in somebody’s argument, just because you happened to agree with them.
posted by panama joe at 6:35 AM on October 9, 2021
My mother fell victim to qanon-ish anti-vaxx conspiracy theories in the last year or so (and I’m not even based in the US). It hit me pretty hard and made me search for answers as to why people could fall for things that are so illogical and blatantly wrong.
This comment from another poster above struck a chord with me -
Especially if there's trauma in your life that you've associated, rightly or wrongly, with the medical establishment.
In my mother’s case she has been suffering from debilitating chronic fatigue for years, with no clear medical diagnosis. She is isolated and partially disabled by her experience - someone who has been tremendously let down by the medical establishment. Over the years she has turned to all sorts of wellness-type “cures” and evangelical Christianity through YouTube videos and acquired a lot of conspiracy beliefs along the way (e.g. aliens, that the end times are near etc.)
Fundamentally I don’t think the specific content of their belief matters so much as their innate feeling that the truth is somehow being kept hidden from them by those in power. Conspiracy theories feed this unmet emotional need to finally know the truth and confirm their innate bias. The “facts” they choose to believe ultimately fill the narrative structure they want, making perfect sense within that context (and complete nonsense outside of it). In short, they’re not gaslighting you and many of them probably wholeheartedly believe in these theories for the reasons outlined above.
I also think belief in conspiracies are a reaction/ coping mechanism for those who feel powerless and disenfranchised, a way for them to assert control and overlay a narrative onto the meaningless, painful chaos that is modern life. Just my 2c.
posted by pandanpanda at 12:13 AM on October 15, 2021 [1 favorite]
This comment from another poster above struck a chord with me -
Especially if there's trauma in your life that you've associated, rightly or wrongly, with the medical establishment.
In my mother’s case she has been suffering from debilitating chronic fatigue for years, with no clear medical diagnosis. She is isolated and partially disabled by her experience - someone who has been tremendously let down by the medical establishment. Over the years she has turned to all sorts of wellness-type “cures” and evangelical Christianity through YouTube videos and acquired a lot of conspiracy beliefs along the way (e.g. aliens, that the end times are near etc.)
Fundamentally I don’t think the specific content of their belief matters so much as their innate feeling that the truth is somehow being kept hidden from them by those in power. Conspiracy theories feed this unmet emotional need to finally know the truth and confirm their innate bias. The “facts” they choose to believe ultimately fill the narrative structure they want, making perfect sense within that context (and complete nonsense outside of it). In short, they’re not gaslighting you and many of them probably wholeheartedly believe in these theories for the reasons outlined above.
I also think belief in conspiracies are a reaction/ coping mechanism for those who feel powerless and disenfranchised, a way for them to assert control and overlay a narrative onto the meaningless, painful chaos that is modern life. Just my 2c.
posted by pandanpanda at 12:13 AM on October 15, 2021 [1 favorite]
« Older Help - Neighbor’s laundry is gonna kill me | U.K. based folks- Recommend me a GOOD accountant... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
Occasionally, they will be presented with counterintuitive (to their theory) evidence. Instead of that causing them to have an intellectual crisis, they usually "double down" and believe their theory even harder.
In all my years debating problematic views (let's say, religion, or abortion) I've found that with many people, they enjoy the debate and fact that the opposing side doesn't have an answer for catchy debate point F. The way I've actually seen people change their mind, or concede, is when you literally ignore the topic for 2+ years. The view is often part of their identity, and identities fade.
posted by bbqturtle at 4:43 AM on October 7, 2021 [20 favorites]